LARRY ALVIN FLEMING, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Presentence Investigation Report cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The conviction is affirmed. The court’s imposition of restitution in the amount of $850.00 is reversed, and the cause is remanded for a determination of the value of the unrecovered guns stolen on July 17, 1987, and an imposition of restitution in that amount. See Thrasher v. State, 528 So. 2d 474 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988).
WENTWORTH, NIMMONS and ZEHMER, JJ., concur.
ZEHMER, Judge.
The State of Florida moves for rehearing of our decision to remand this case to the lower court to determine the value of the two unrecovered guns stolen on July 17, 1987, and impose restitution in that amount.1 The state asserts in its motion that the value of the guns could be determined from the presentence investigation report before the court below, which is in the record on appeal. Because at the sentencing hearing the defendant did not raise a bona fide objection to the presentence investigation report and the value of the guns recited therein, hearsay evidence was sufficient to determine the amount of restitution. Flanagan v. State, 536 So. 2d 275 (Fla.1988). Therefore, the motion for rehearing is granted. We reverse and remand with directions to modify the restitution order to require payment of restitution in the amount of $387.50, the value of the unrecovered guns that were stolen on July 17, 1987.
WENTWORTH and NIMMONS, JJ., concur. . Appellant did not file a response to the motion for rehearing.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Thomas v. State, 581 So. 2d 992 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)…objection to that evidence, the appellant in this case made a proper objection, and it should have been sustained. Flanagan v. State, 536 So. 2d 275 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); Mansell v. State, 498 So. 2d 604 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). See also Fleming v. State, 547 So. 2d 668 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). The gun shop owner and his employee might have been qualified to give an opinion as to the value of the guns, and the books they referred to might have supplied the proper information. However, the men did not testify and the bo…
-
Vanlieu v. State, 630 So. 2d 1218 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)…tate, 458 So. 2d 1222 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). To establish the proper amount for such an award, a PSI may suffice, unless the defendant objects to the amount set forth in the report. Loos v. State, 585 So. 2d 1181 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991); Fleming v. State, 547 So. 2d 668 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). However, if the defendant objects to the amount of the claim at the sentencing hearing, as occurred in this case, he is entitled to a hearing based on competent evidence to establish its amount. See Nettles v. State, 611 So. 2d…
-
Loos v. State, 585 So. 2d 1181 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)…not really agreeing to that.” The presentence investigation is competent evidence of valuation for purposes of a restitution order absent a bona fide objection to the valuation contained in the pre-sentence investigation report. Fleming v. State, 547 So. 2d 668 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); Flanagan v. State, 536 So. 2d 275 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988) (a “bona fide objection” is some demonstration that the restitution amount in the PSI is improper). Cf. Bell v. State, 576 So. 2d 881 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991). In the present case,…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Flanagan v. State, 536 So. 2d 275 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)
- Thrasher v. State, 528 So. 2d 474 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)